A senior Watford councillor has apologised for posting a picture on her Twitter feed attacking David Cameron using his dead disabled son Ivan.

Labour councillor Anne Joynes retweeted the image, which was originally posted by another Twitter user, of the Prime Minister with a child’s coffin bearing the name ‘Ivan’.

The picture was accompanied by the statement saying: “Disabled people. Out of sight. Out of Mind”.

Ivan Cameron, who suffered from cerebral palsy and epilepsy, died aged six in February 2009.

The retweeted image.

When contacted by the Watford Observer, Councillor Joynes, who sits on both Watford Council and Hertfordshire County Council, said the retweet was an “absolute mistake” that she attributed to “careless” use of social media.

Councillor Joynes said: “I would never, ever use anything like that. It’s despicable to put it up.
“I do not use Twitter like that. It was a complete mistake. It’s awful. It was careless. I shall have to be really careful what I do on Twitter.”

However, Councillor Joynes maintained she would continue to use the popular social media website adding it was not her intention to upset or offend anyone.

Councillor Joynes, who represents the Leggatts and Callowland areas, added: "I have done that by mistake, I thought it was something else. It’s not something I would do.

“That was an absolute mistake. I will use Twitter responsibly. I’m not going on there to do that, but I might make jokes - I have some friends on there - but not to denigrate others.

“I would never want to say anything against disabled people and I have had a great hand in supporting causes.

“I feel what’s happening to disabled people with the living allowance being taken away is not right.

“I’m not the first person to make a mistake, and I won’t be the last. Everyone learns from their mistakes. I am sorry if I have upset or offended anyone. It was not my intension.”

Comments

Honest Rog
2:05am Thu 3 Jul 14

Nothing like a dose of diversionary tactics eh? This councillor has said/tweeted nothing that was factually incorrect. Those who make more of the, arguable, indelicacy of the tweet than the actual subject i.e. government attacks on the disabled show shallowness of thought. A great double whammy from the right-wing thought police: Kick an opposition politician whilst deflecting deserved criticism from those responsible for the criminal re-distribution of wealth from the poor and weak in society to the idle rich in the form of slashing benefits in order to fund tax cuts for our masters.

Nothing like a dose of diversionary tactics eh? This councillor has said/tweeted nothing that was factually incorrect. Those who make more of the, arguable, indelicacy of the tweet than the actual subject i.e. government attacks on the disabled show shallowness of thought. A great double whammy from the right-wing thought police: Kick an opposition politician whilst deflecting deserved criticism from those responsible for the criminal re-distribution of wealth from the poor and weak in society to the idle rich in the form of slashing benefits in order to fund tax cuts for our masters.Honest Rog

Nothing like a dose of diversionary tactics eh? This councillor has said/tweeted nothing that was factually incorrect. Those who make more of the, arguable, indelicacy of the tweet than the actual subject i.e. government attacks on the disabled show shallowness of thought. A great double whammy from the right-wing thought police: Kick an opposition politician whilst deflecting deserved criticism from those responsible for the criminal re-distribution of wealth from the poor and weak in society to the idle rich in the form of slashing benefits in order to fund tax cuts for our masters.

Score: -20

jasonwatford
8:18pm Wed 2 Jul 14

Tough should resign , that is disgusting

Tough should resign , that is disgustingjasonwatford

Tough should resign , that is disgusting

Score: 39

Phil Cox (UKIP)
9:14pm Wed 2 Jul 14

Feeble apology, if you can call it that.

I think what she did was disgusting and she should resign forthwith.

How absolutely sick.

Feeble apology, if you can call it that.
I think what she did was disgusting and she should resign forthwith.
How absolutely sick.Phil Cox (UKIP)

Feeble apology, if you can call it that.

I think what she did was disgusting and she should resign forthwith.

How absolutely sick.

Score: 25

Jack18
2:21am Thu 3 Jul 14

That is disgusting, she should resign with immediate effect.

That is disgusting, she should resign with immediate effect.Jack18

That is disgusting, she should resign with immediate effect.

Score: 23

Cuetip
9:45pm Wed 2 Jul 14

If you really want to see someone’s true character give them a bit of power and you see their true colours because it tends to have corrupting influence especially how they think, perceive others and speak.

Unfortunately what we read is nothing compared to what politicians really think in private in their ‘safe circles’.

It is below the belt including family members.

If you really want to see someone’s true character give them a bit of power and you see their true colours because it tends to have corrupting influence especially how they think, perceive others and speak.
Unfortunately what we read is nothing compared to what politicians really think in private in their ‘safe circles’.
It is below the belt including family members.Cuetip

If you really want to see someone’s true character give them a bit of power and you see their true colours because it tends to have corrupting influence especially how they think, perceive others and speak.

Unfortunately what we read is nothing compared to what politicians really think in private in their ‘safe circles’.

It is below the belt including family members.

Score: 20

Phil Cox (UKIP)
6:27am Thu 3 Jul 14

Honest Rog wrote…

Nothing like a dose of diversionary tactics eh? This councillor has said/tweeted nothing that was factually incorrect. Those who make more of the, arguable, indelicacy of the tweet than the actual subject i.e. government attacks on the disabled show shallowness of thought. A great double whammy from the right-wing thought police: Kick an opposition politician whilst deflecting deserved criticism from those responsible for the criminal re-distribution of wealth from the poor and weak in society to the idle rich in the form of slashing benefits in order to fund tax cuts for our masters.

Diversionary tactics?

Have you no sense of decency to see what the issue is here?

Have you no sense of shame? Of right and wrong?

[quote][p][bold]Honest Rog[/bold] wrote:
Nothing like a dose of diversionary tactics eh? This councillor has said/tweeted nothing that was factually incorrect. Those who make more of the, arguable, indelicacy of the tweet than the actual subject i.e. government attacks on the disabled show shallowness of thought. A great double whammy from the right-wing thought police: Kick an opposition politician whilst deflecting deserved criticism from those responsible for the criminal re-distribution of wealth from the poor and weak in society to the idle rich in the form of slashing benefits in order to fund tax cuts for our masters.[/p][/quote]Diversionary tactics?
Have you no sense of decency to see what the issue is here?
Have you no sense of shame? Of right and wrong?Phil Cox (UKIP)

Honest Rog wrote…

Nothing like a dose of diversionary tactics eh? This councillor has said/tweeted nothing that was factually incorrect. Those who make more of the, arguable, indelicacy of the tweet than the actual subject i.e. government attacks on the disabled show shallowness of thought. A great double whammy from the right-wing thought police: Kick an opposition politician whilst deflecting deserved criticism from those responsible for the criminal re-distribution of wealth from the poor and weak in society to the idle rich in the form of slashing benefits in order to fund tax cuts for our masters.

Diversionary tactics?

Have you no sense of decency to see what the issue is here?

Have you no sense of shame? Of right and wrong?

Score: 17

MJ1
6:30pm Thu 3 Jul 14

Well you are almost the only one complaining. Most (decent) people are fair minded and accept we all sometimes make mistakes and accept apologies. But that is not the UKIP way. Intolerence is your middle name.
In your case you are just cynically trying to make political capital out of this. That's what I call despicable.

Well you are almost the only one complaining. Most (decent) people are fair minded and accept we all sometimes make mistakes and accept apologies. But that is not the UKIP way. Intolerence is your middle name.
In your case you are just cynically trying to make political capital out of this. That's what I call despicable.MJ1

Well you are almost the only one complaining. Most (decent) people are fair minded and accept we all sometimes make mistakes and accept apologies. But that is not the UKIP way. Intolerence is your middle name.
In your case you are just cynically trying to make political capital out of this. That's what I call despicable.

Score: 2

Hornets number 12 fan
7:52am Thu 3 Jul 14

jasonwatford wrote…

Tough should resign , that is disgusting

I'll tell you whats REALLY disgusting, The Governments treatment of the sick and disabled of the UK! shame people don't get as vocal about that! Many many times I've seen this comparison with Cameron and his son purely because they cannot believe someone who had a disabled son can be so heartless to similar people.

[quote][p][bold]jasonwatford[/bold] wrote:
Tough should resign , that is disgusting[/p][/quote]I'll tell you whats REALLY disgusting, The Governments treatment of the sick and disabled of the UK! shame people don't get as vocal about that! Many many times I've seen this comparison with Cameron and his son purely because they cannot believe someone who had a disabled son can be so heartless to similar people.Hornets number 12 fan

jasonwatford wrote…

Tough should resign , that is disgusting

I'll tell you whats REALLY disgusting, The Governments treatment of the sick and disabled of the UK! shame people don't get as vocal about that! Many many times I've seen this comparison with Cameron and his son purely because they cannot believe someone who had a disabled son can be so heartless to similar people.

Score: -3

ancientandageing
8:23pm Thu 3 Jul 14

I blame the immigrants coming over here, working in care homes, looking after the old folks, coming over here working in the coffeee shops, so the middle aged UKIPers can buy cheap coffee, safe in the knowledge the new youngsters will pay tax for there social care in old age, in the meanwhile just have a pop at labour all the while whilst shamlessly rellying on the welfare state for health and pensions, the welfare state that Labour created

I blame the immigrants coming over here, working in care homes, looking after the old folks, coming over here working in the coffeee shops, so the middle aged UKIPers can buy cheap coffee, safe in the knowledge the new youngsters will pay tax for there social care in old age, in the meanwhile just have a pop at labour all the while whilst shamlessly rellying on the welfare state for health and pensions, the welfare state that Labour createdancientandageing

I blame the immigrants coming over here, working in care homes, looking after the old folks, coming over here working in the coffeee shops, so the middle aged UKIPers can buy cheap coffee, safe in the knowledge the new youngsters will pay tax for there social care in old age, in the meanwhile just have a pop at labour all the while whilst shamlessly rellying on the welfare state for health and pensions, the welfare state that Labour created

Score: -3

MJ1
9:05am Thu 3 Jul 14

Phil Cox (UKIP) wrote…

Honest Rog wrote…

Nothing like a dose of diversionary tactics eh? This councillor has said/tweeted nothing that was factually incorrect. Those who make more of the, arguable, indelicacy of the tweet than the actual subject i.e. government attacks on the disabled show shallowness of thought. A great double whammy from the right-wing thought police: Kick an opposition politician whilst deflecting deserved criticism from those responsible for the criminal re-distribution of wealth from the poor and weak in society to the idle rich in the form of slashing benefits in order to fund tax cuts for our masters.

Diversionary tactics?

Have you no sense of decency to see what the issue is here?

Have you no sense of shame? Of right and wrong?

Well she made a heartfelt apology. Which is more than you did Phil Cox when you floated the idea of moving Watford Hospital out of Watford and then tried to backtrack saying you'd been misunderstood. People respect those who make mistakes, learn from them and genuinely apologise but not those who do not take responsibility for their actions.

[quote][p][bold]Phil Cox (UKIP)[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Honest Rog[/bold] wrote:
Nothing like a dose of diversionary tactics eh? This councillor has said/tweeted nothing that was factually incorrect. Those who make more of the, arguable, indelicacy of the tweet than the actual subject i.e. government attacks on the disabled show shallowness of thought. A great double whammy from the right-wing thought police: Kick an opposition politician whilst deflecting deserved criticism from those responsible for the criminal re-distribution of wealth from the poor and weak in society to the idle rich in the form of slashing benefits in order to fund tax cuts for our masters.[/p][/quote]Diversionary tactics?
Have you no sense of decency to see what the issue is here?
Have you no sense of shame? Of right and wrong?[/p][/quote]Well she made a heartfelt apology. Which is more than you did Phil Cox when you floated the idea of moving Watford Hospital out of Watford and then tried to backtrack saying you'd been misunderstood. People respect those who make mistakes, learn from them and genuinely apologise but not those who do not take responsibility for their actions.MJ1

Phil Cox (UKIP) wrote…

Honest Rog wrote…

Nothing like a dose of diversionary tactics eh? This councillor has said/tweeted nothing that was factually incorrect. Those who make more of the, arguable, indelicacy of the tweet than the actual subject i.e. government attacks on the disabled show shallowness of thought. A great double whammy from the right-wing thought police: Kick an opposition politician whilst deflecting deserved criticism from those responsible for the criminal re-distribution of wealth from the poor and weak in society to the idle rich in the form of slashing benefits in order to fund tax cuts for our masters.

Diversionary tactics?

Have you no sense of decency to see what the issue is here?

Have you no sense of shame? Of right and wrong?

Well she made a heartfelt apology. Which is more than you did Phil Cox when you floated the idea of moving Watford Hospital out of Watford and then tried to backtrack saying you'd been misunderstood. People respect those who make mistakes, learn from them and genuinely apologise but not those who do not take responsibility for their actions.

Score: 2

Cuetip
9:38am Thu 3 Jul 14

Hornet number 12 fan all parties have elements of pretending to be civilised and even empathetic some more than others. But you do raise a good point amid the noise of this debate which plays back into tribal politics.

Ex-boarders make up what Toynbee called a ‘dominant minority’ in British life despite the smooth duplicity in which David Cameron presented himself as an ordinary guy in the recent election encapsulated by slogans ‘We’re all in it together’.Yer right on man.

Therapists have expressed concern for some time about the negative phenomena and effects of public school boarding – the emergence of a defensive personality and 'disowned self', ****/bullying, abuse, hot-housing, distortion of sexuality, sense of separateness and entitlement, lack of empathy for others, and so on. Look at how they eagerly conduct debates on the NHS in the Hse of Commons as if it was a brutal blood sport eg fox hunting or the EU which one would have thought required a degree of intelligent sensitivity and think this is perfectly acceptable.

Boarding school children learn it’s better not to complain; most ex-boarder adults fail to recognise their intimacy avoidance and other habits, which only emerge in private settings, as anything but normal.

Omitting for now those who didn’t survive very well, due to bullying or sexual abuse in the 24-hour institutions they grew up in, their confidence has a tendency to be a brittle shell, since the built-in expectations that the ex-boarder should end up chairman of the board or prime minister creates additional shame.

Actually, these issues rarely get therapeutic attention or are shouted down by their minders and society places these values on a pedestal and for the rest of us to copy. Why has the latest evidence on abuse shredded?

Hornet number 12 fan all parties have elements of pretending to be civilised and even empathetic some more than others. But you do raise a good point amid the noise of this debate which plays back into tribal politics.
Ex-boarders make up what Toynbee called a ‘dominant minority’ in British life despite the smooth duplicity in which David Cameron presented himself as an ordinary guy in the recent election encapsulated by slogans ‘We’re all in it together’.Yer right on man.
Therapists have expressed concern for some time about the negative phenomena and effects of public school boarding – the emergence of a defensive personality and 'disowned self', ****/bullying, abuse, hot-housing, distortion of sexuality, sense of separateness and entitlement, lack of empathy for others, and so on. Look at how they eagerly conduct debates on the NHS in the Hse of Commons as if it was a brutal blood sport eg fox hunting or the EU which one would have thought required a degree of intelligent sensitivity and think this is perfectly acceptable.
Boarding school children learn it’s better not to complain; most ex-boarder adults fail to recognise their intimacy avoidance and other habits, which only emerge in private settings, as anything but normal.
Omitting for now those who didn’t survive very well, due to bullying or sexual abuse in the 24-hour institutions they grew up in, their confidence has a tendency to be a brittle shell, since the built-in expectations that the ex-boarder should end up chairman of the board or prime minister creates additional shame.
Actually, these issues rarely get therapeutic attention or are shouted down by their minders and society places these values on a pedestal and for the rest of us to copy. Why has the latest evidence on abuse shredded?Cuetip

Hornet number 12 fan all parties have elements of pretending to be civilised and even empathetic some more than others. But you do raise a good point amid the noise of this debate which plays back into tribal politics.

Ex-boarders make up what Toynbee called a ‘dominant minority’ in British life despite the smooth duplicity in which David Cameron presented himself as an ordinary guy in the recent election encapsulated by slogans ‘We’re all in it together’.Yer right on man.

Therapists have expressed concern for some time about the negative phenomena and effects of public school boarding – the emergence of a defensive personality and 'disowned self', ****/bullying, abuse, hot-housing, distortion of sexuality, sense of separateness and entitlement, lack of empathy for others, and so on. Look at how they eagerly conduct debates on the NHS in the Hse of Commons as if it was a brutal blood sport eg fox hunting or the EU which one would have thought required a degree of intelligent sensitivity and think this is perfectly acceptable.

Boarding school children learn it’s better not to complain; most ex-boarder adults fail to recognise their intimacy avoidance and other habits, which only emerge in private settings, as anything but normal.

Omitting for now those who didn’t survive very well, due to bullying or sexual abuse in the 24-hour institutions they grew up in, their confidence has a tendency to be a brittle shell, since the built-in expectations that the ex-boarder should end up chairman of the board or prime minister creates additional shame.

Actually, these issues rarely get therapeutic attention or are shouted down by their minders and society places these values on a pedestal and for the rest of us to copy. Why has the latest evidence on abuse shredded?

Score: 1

Wacko Jacko
9:48am Thu 3 Jul 14

Wasn't it Cameron who once said 'too many tweets makes a ****!' How true that is.

Wasn't it Cameron who once said 'too many tweets makes a ****!' How true that is.Wacko Jacko

Wasn't it Cameron who once said 'too many tweets makes a ****!' How true that is.

Score: 13

Phil Cox (UKIP)
9:55am Thu 3 Jul 14

MJ1 wrote…

Phil Cox (UKIP) wrote…

Honest Rog wrote…

Nothing like a dose of diversionary tactics eh? This councillor has said/tweeted nothing that was factually incorrect. Those who make more of the, arguable, indelicacy of the tweet than the actual subject i.e. government attacks on the disabled show shallowness of thought. A great double whammy from the right-wing thought police: Kick an opposition politician whilst deflecting deserved criticism from those responsible for the criminal re-distribution of wealth from the poor and weak in society to the idle rich in the form of slashing benefits in order to fund tax cuts for our masters.

Diversionary tactics?

Have you no sense of decency to see what the issue is here?

Have you no sense of shame? Of right and wrong?

Well she made a heartfelt apology. Which is more than you did Phil Cox when you floated the idea of moving Watford Hospital out of Watford and then tried to backtrack saying you'd been misunderstood. People respect those who make mistakes, learn from them and genuinely apologise but not those who do not take responsibility for their actions.

Typical Labour, trying to change the subject, and even then distorting the truth horribly in their favour.

Heartfelt apology MJ1? It doesn't sound like one to me.

Quite despicable.

What is wrong with Labour politicians that they can do this in the first place and then do not find themselves able to make a full and heartfelt apology?

Could it be some politicians are only sorry to have been shown up for what they really are?

[quote][p][bold]MJ1[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Phil Cox (UKIP)[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Honest Rog[/bold] wrote:
Nothing like a dose of diversionary tactics eh? This councillor has said/tweeted nothing that was factually incorrect. Those who make more of the, arguable, indelicacy of the tweet than the actual subject i.e. government attacks on the disabled show shallowness of thought. A great double whammy from the right-wing thought police: Kick an opposition politician whilst deflecting deserved criticism from those responsible for the criminal re-distribution of wealth from the poor and weak in society to the idle rich in the form of slashing benefits in order to fund tax cuts for our masters.[/p][/quote]Diversionary tactics?
Have you no sense of decency to see what the issue is here?
Have you no sense of shame? Of right and wrong?[/p][/quote]Well she made a heartfelt apology. Which is more than you did Phil Cox when you floated the idea of moving Watford Hospital out of Watford and then tried to backtrack saying you'd been misunderstood. People respect those who make mistakes, learn from them and genuinely apologise but not those who do not take responsibility for their actions.[/p][/quote]Typical Labour, trying to change the subject, and even then distorting the truth horribly in their favour.
Heartfelt apology MJ1? It doesn't sound like one to me.
Quite despicable.
What is wrong with Labour politicians that they can do this in the first place and then do not find themselves able to make a full and heartfelt apology?
Could it be some politicians are only sorry to have been shown up for what they really are?Phil Cox (UKIP)

MJ1 wrote…

Phil Cox (UKIP) wrote…

Honest Rog wrote…

Nothing like a dose of diversionary tactics eh? This councillor has said/tweeted nothing that was factually incorrect. Those who make more of the, arguable, indelicacy of the tweet than the actual subject i.e. government attacks on the disabled show shallowness of thought. A great double whammy from the right-wing thought police: Kick an opposition politician whilst deflecting deserved criticism from those responsible for the criminal re-distribution of wealth from the poor and weak in society to the idle rich in the form of slashing benefits in order to fund tax cuts for our masters.

Diversionary tactics?

Have you no sense of decency to see what the issue is here?

Have you no sense of shame? Of right and wrong?

Well she made a heartfelt apology. Which is more than you did Phil Cox when you floated the idea of moving Watford Hospital out of Watford and then tried to backtrack saying you'd been misunderstood. People respect those who make mistakes, learn from them and genuinely apologise but not those who do not take responsibility for their actions.

Typical Labour, trying to change the subject, and even then distorting the truth horribly in their favour.

Heartfelt apology MJ1? It doesn't sound like one to me.

Quite despicable.

What is wrong with Labour politicians that they can do this in the first place and then do not find themselves able to make a full and heartfelt apology?

Could it be some politicians are only sorry to have been shown up for what they really are?

Score: 1

drunkenduck
9:58am Thu 3 Jul 14

Should Councillor Anne Joynes either resign or be sacked for this comment, tweet. If someone had used, made a racist comment, they be more likely to be sacked. So why should this be anything different.

It is TRUE that is conservative / lib dem government has attacked the disabled folks and have made many lives worse, hell since they've been in power. So the tweet may be seem to be disgusting and totally wrong using Cameron & his dead disabled son Ivan.

But the over all question, why is then David Cameron and his party (including Lib Dems) attacking disabled folks and making their lives hell? So you may say (not saying this is correct or right) that Anne Joynes is trying to make a point, and if Cameron disabled son Ivan was alive, would this government be attacking disabled folks?

And with MJ1 comment about Phil Cox when you floated the idea of moving Watford Hospital out of Watford. There was once a idea to transform the formal school of Langelybury (now closed) into a super hospital. And have one major hospital covering Watford, Hemel & St Albans but that idea was scraped - guess by whom.

Should Councillor Anne Joynes either resign or be sacked for this comment, tweet. If someone had used, made a racist comment, they be more likely to be sacked. So why should this be anything different.
It is TRUE that is conservative / lib dem government has attacked the disabled folks and have made many lives worse, hell since they've been in power. So the tweet may be seem to be disgusting and totally wrong using Cameron & his dead disabled son Ivan.
But the over all question, why is then David Cameron and his party (including Lib Dems) attacking disabled folks and making their lives hell? So you may say (not saying this is correct or right) that Anne Joynes is trying to make a point, and if Cameron disabled son Ivan was alive, would this government be attacking disabled folks?
And with MJ1 comment about Phil Cox when you floated the idea of moving Watford Hospital out of Watford. There was once a idea to transform the formal school of Langelybury (now closed) into a super hospital. And have one major hospital covering Watford, Hemel & St Albans but that idea was scraped - guess by whom.drunkenduck

Should Councillor Anne Joynes either resign or be sacked for this comment, tweet. If someone had used, made a racist comment, they be more likely to be sacked. So why should this be anything different.

It is TRUE that is conservative / lib dem government has attacked the disabled folks and have made many lives worse, hell since they've been in power. So the tweet may be seem to be disgusting and totally wrong using Cameron & his dead disabled son Ivan.

But the over all question, why is then David Cameron and his party (including Lib Dems) attacking disabled folks and making their lives hell? So you may say (not saying this is correct or right) that Anne Joynes is trying to make a point, and if Cameron disabled son Ivan was alive, would this government be attacking disabled folks?

And with MJ1 comment about Phil Cox when you floated the idea of moving Watford Hospital out of Watford. There was once a idea to transform the formal school of Langelybury (now closed) into a super hospital. And have one major hospital covering Watford, Hemel & St Albans but that idea was scraped - guess by whom.

Score: 2

jayyson
10:25am Thu 3 Jul 14

David Cameron continues to try and wipe the disabled from the welfare state with his commandante Iain Duncan Smith. People think its some kind of vendetta against Disabled coming from reverse psychology of some sort

David Cameron continues to try and wipe the disabled from the welfare state with his commandante Iain Duncan Smith. People think its some kind of vendetta against Disabled coming from reverse psychology of some sortjayyson

David Cameron continues to try and wipe the disabled from the welfare state with his commandante Iain Duncan Smith. People think its some kind of vendetta against Disabled coming from reverse psychology of some sort

Score: 0

garston tony
11:16am Thu 3 Jul 14

HN12 and co, some would argue that the sick and disabled are still getting a good deal in this country but that (and this stands across the welfare state, and is something that should never have been allowed to happen in the first place) the country can no longer afford to pay for peoples wants and need to concentrate resourses on peoples needs.

I know someone who works and is very well paid yet who is entitled to a mobility car, why is it right that money is being given to support someone who could support themselves? Its not like the car is even specially adapted for them. I know another person whose disability means they are in great pain when they drive, whose spouse (the only other person in the household) cant drive yet they also have a motability car purely because it is something they are entitled to. Their cars have been renewed at every opportunity with barely any mileage on them. How is this right, how can you defend not tackling this type of waste?

I’m all for meeting genuine need but the system has gone too far and is providing too many, for want of a better way of putting it, luxuries. Its not right that the millions of tax payers who struggle financially are paying for others to have things that they cant afford themselves and aren’t actually necessary.

HN12 and co, some would argue that the sick and disabled are still getting a good deal in this country but that (and this stands across the welfare state, and is something that should never have been allowed to happen in the first place) the country can no longer afford to pay for peoples wants and need to concentrate resourses on peoples needs.
I know someone who works and is very well paid yet who is entitled to a mobility car, why is it right that money is being given to support someone who could support themselves? Its not like the car is even specially adapted for them. I know another person whose disability means they are in great pain when they drive, whose spouse (the only other person in the household) cant drive yet they also have a motability car purely because it is something they are entitled to. Their cars have been renewed at every opportunity with barely any mileage on them. How is this right, how can you defend not tackling this type of waste?
I’m all for meeting genuine need but the system has gone too far and is providing too many, for want of a better way of putting it, luxuries. Its not right that the millions of tax payers who struggle financially are paying for others to have things that they cant afford themselves and aren’t actually necessary.garston tony

HN12 and co, some would argue that the sick and disabled are still getting a good deal in this country but that (and this stands across the welfare state, and is something that should never have been allowed to happen in the first place) the country can no longer afford to pay for peoples wants and need to concentrate resourses on peoples needs.

I know someone who works and is very well paid yet who is entitled to a mobility car, why is it right that money is being given to support someone who could support themselves? Its not like the car is even specially adapted for them. I know another person whose disability means they are in great pain when they drive, whose spouse (the only other person in the household) cant drive yet they also have a motability car purely because it is something they are entitled to. Their cars have been renewed at every opportunity with barely any mileage on them. How is this right, how can you defend not tackling this type of waste?

I’m all for meeting genuine need but the system has gone too far and is providing too many, for want of a better way of putting it, luxuries. Its not right that the millions of tax payers who struggle financially are paying for others to have things that they cant afford themselves and aren’t actually necessary.

Score: 4

garston tony
11:14am Thu 3 Jul 14

Having posted said tweet she cant claim ‘I would never ever use anything like that’. You just have, and have therefore outed yourself as a liar on top of everything else.

MJ1, you’re a million miles off trying to link this cllrs comments with those Phil Cox made about Watford Gen.

It is a source of constant wonder how people do not engage their brains when using social media, often saying things that they wouldn’t dream of saying at any other time.

Having posted said tweet she cant claim ‘I would never ever use anything like that’. You just have, and have therefore outed yourself as a liar on top of everything else.
MJ1, you’re a million miles off trying to link this cllrs comments with those Phil Cox made about Watford Gen.
It is a source of constant wonder how people do not engage their brains when using social media, often saying things that they wouldn’t dream of saying at any other time.garston tony

Having posted said tweet she cant claim ‘I would never ever use anything like that’. You just have, and have therefore outed yourself as a liar on top of everything else.

MJ1, you’re a million miles off trying to link this cllrs comments with those Phil Cox made about Watford Gen.

It is a source of constant wonder how people do not engage their brains when using social media, often saying things that they wouldn’t dream of saying at any other time.

Score: 7

G_Whiz
11:39am Thu 3 Jul 14

She's not the only thicko at Watford Council, just another one that moans but never comes up with answers themselves.

She's not the only thicko at Watford Council, just another one that moans but never comes up with answers themselves.G_Whiz

She's not the only thicko at Watford Council, just another one that moans but never comes up with answers themselves.

Score: 3

ancientandageing
11:42pm Thu 3 Jul 14

Gosh:= I can't read the name from the image on the WO website it is not even that clear on twitter https://twitter.com/
State_Slave/status/4
84016263950118912

So all this huffing and puffing from UKIP is rot you can't even read it.

She has clearly apalogised, and probably could noy read the name, grow up please possums

Gosh:= I can't read the name from the image on the WO website it is not even that clear on twitter https://twitter.com/
State_Slave/status/4
84016263950118912
So all this huffing and puffing from UKIP is rot you can't even read it.
She has clearly apalogised, and probably could noy read the name, grow up please possumsancientandageing

Gosh:= I can't read the name from the image on the WO website it is not even that clear on twitter https://twitter.com/
State_Slave/status/4
84016263950118912

So all this huffing and puffing from UKIP is rot you can't even read it.

She has clearly apalogised, and probably could noy read the name, grow up please possums

Score: 0

northofwatfordpete
2:25pm Thu 3 Jul 14

Pretty much sums the labour party up at the moment - lack of moral code,ideas, direction and leadership.

I have been a labour voter for 40 years.

Pretty much sums the labour party up at the moment - lack of moral code,ideas, direction and leadership.
I have been a labour voter for 40 years.northofwatfordpete

Pretty much sums the labour party up at the moment - lack of moral code,ideas, direction and leadership.

I have been a labour voter for 40 years.

Score: 2

ancientandageing
3:31pm Thu 3 Jul 14

I am getting old and forgetfull, but take of the name Ivan and the tweet is a different tweet, now put the image on a smart phone and see if you see the name.
As I said I am getting old and untill I read the article I did not realise who Ivan was so well Phill Cox may well wring his hands and call for whatever he likes, I say Anne Joynes has made a big mistake said sorry and I hope she learns from it. It would however be a sad thing if she became less forthright and robust in my opinion.

I am getting old and forgetfull, but take of the name Ivan and the tweet is a different tweet, now put the image on a smart phone and see if you see the name.
As I said I am getting old and untill I read the article I did not realise who Ivan was so well Phill Cox may well wring his hands and call for whatever he likes, I say Anne Joynes has made a big mistake said sorry and I hope she learns from it. It would however be a sad thing if she became less forthright and robust in my opinion.ancientandageing

I am getting old and forgetfull, but take of the name Ivan and the tweet is a different tweet, now put the image on a smart phone and see if you see the name.
As I said I am getting old and untill I read the article I did not realise who Ivan was so well Phill Cox may well wring his hands and call for whatever he likes, I say Anne Joynes has made a big mistake said sorry and I hope she learns from it. It would however be a sad thing if she became less forthright and robust in my opinion.

Score: 4

MJ1
4:06pm Thu 3 Jul 14

Phil Cox (UKIP) wrote…

MJ1 wrote…

Phil Cox (UKIP) wrote…

Honest Rog wrote…

Nothing like a dose of diversionary tactics eh? This councillor has said/tweeted nothing that was factually incorrect. Those who make more of the, arguable, indelicacy of the tweet than the actual subject i.e. government attacks on the disabled show shallowness of thought. A great double whammy from the right-wing thought police: Kick an opposition politician whilst deflecting deserved criticism from those responsible for the criminal re-distribution of wealth from the poor and weak in society to the idle rich in the form of slashing benefits in order to fund tax cuts for our masters.

Diversionary tactics?

Have you no sense of decency to see what the issue is here?

Have you no sense of shame? Of right and wrong?

Well she made a heartfelt apology. Which is more than you did Phil Cox when you floated the idea of moving Watford Hospital out of Watford and then tried to backtrack saying you'd been misunderstood. People respect those who make mistakes, learn from them and genuinely apologise but not those who do not take responsibility for their actions.

Typical Labour, trying to change the subject, and even then distorting the truth horribly in their favour.

Heartfelt apology MJ1? It doesn't sound like one to me.

Quite despicable.

What is wrong with Labour politicians that they can do this in the first place and then do not find themselves able to make a full and heartfelt apology?

Could it be some politicians are only sorry to have been shown up for what they really are?

Typical UKIP see a passing bandwagon and try to jump on it. Only problem is Phil Cox that you have missed it by over playing your hand. The reason you wouldnt recognise a heartfelt apology is almost certainly because you've never made one. And I expect you never make mistakes either?

[quote][p][bold]Phil Cox (UKIP)[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]MJ1[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Phil Cox (UKIP)[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Honest Rog[/bold] wrote:
Nothing like a dose of diversionary tactics eh? This councillor has said/tweeted nothing that was factually incorrect. Those who make more of the, arguable, indelicacy of the tweet than the actual subject i.e. government attacks on the disabled show shallowness of thought. A great double whammy from the right-wing thought police: Kick an opposition politician whilst deflecting deserved criticism from those responsible for the criminal re-distribution of wealth from the poor and weak in society to the idle rich in the form of slashing benefits in order to fund tax cuts for our masters.[/p][/quote]Diversionary tactics?
Have you no sense of decency to see what the issue is here?
Have you no sense of shame? Of right and wrong?[/p][/quote]Well she made a heartfelt apology. Which is more than you did Phil Cox when you floated the idea of moving Watford Hospital out of Watford and then tried to backtrack saying you'd been misunderstood. People respect those who make mistakes, learn from them and genuinely apologise but not those who do not take responsibility for their actions.[/p][/quote]Typical Labour, trying to change the subject, and even then distorting the truth horribly in their favour.
Heartfelt apology MJ1? It doesn't sound like one to me.
Quite despicable.
What is wrong with Labour politicians that they can do this in the first place and then do not find themselves able to make a full and heartfelt apology?
Could it be some politicians are only sorry to have been shown up for what they really are?[/p][/quote]Typical UKIP see a passing bandwagon and try to jump on it. Only problem is Phil Cox that you have missed it by over playing your hand. The reason you wouldnt recognise a heartfelt apology is almost certainly because you've never made one. And I expect you never make mistakes either?MJ1

Phil Cox (UKIP) wrote…

MJ1 wrote…

Phil Cox (UKIP) wrote…

Honest Rog wrote…

Nothing like a dose of diversionary tactics eh? This councillor has said/tweeted nothing that was factually incorrect. Those who make more of the, arguable, indelicacy of the tweet than the actual subject i.e. government attacks on the disabled show shallowness of thought. A great double whammy from the right-wing thought police: Kick an opposition politician whilst deflecting deserved criticism from those responsible for the criminal re-distribution of wealth from the poor and weak in society to the idle rich in the form of slashing benefits in order to fund tax cuts for our masters.

Diversionary tactics?

Have you no sense of decency to see what the issue is here?

Have you no sense of shame? Of right and wrong?

Well she made a heartfelt apology. Which is more than you did Phil Cox when you floated the idea of moving Watford Hospital out of Watford and then tried to backtrack saying you'd been misunderstood. People respect those who make mistakes, learn from them and genuinely apologise but not those who do not take responsibility for their actions.

Typical Labour, trying to change the subject, and even then distorting the truth horribly in their favour.

Heartfelt apology MJ1? It doesn't sound like one to me.

Quite despicable.

What is wrong with Labour politicians that they can do this in the first place and then do not find themselves able to make a full and heartfelt apology?

Could it be some politicians are only sorry to have been shown up for what they really are?

Typical UKIP see a passing bandwagon and try to jump on it. Only problem is Phil Cox that you have missed it by over playing your hand. The reason you wouldnt recognise a heartfelt apology is almost certainly because you've never made one. And I expect you never make mistakes either?

Score: 3

Phil Cox (UKIP)
4:08pm Thu 3 Jul 14

Can't believe Labour are still trying to spin some sort of justification.

Unbelievable. Literally.

Can't believe Labour are still trying to spin some sort of justification.
Unbelievable. Literally.Phil Cox (UKIP)

Can't believe Labour are still trying to spin some sort of justification.

Unbelievable. Literally.

Score: -3

Phil Cox (UKIP)
4:14pm Thu 3 Jul 14

MJ1 wrote…

Phil Cox (UKIP) wrote…

MJ1 wrote…

Phil Cox (UKIP) wrote…

Honest Rog wrote…

Nothing like a dose of diversionary tactics eh? This councillor has said/tweeted nothing that was factually incorrect. Those who make more of the, arguable, indelicacy of the tweet than the actual subject i.e. government attacks on the disabled show shallowness of thought. A great double whammy from the right-wing thought police: Kick an opposition politician whilst deflecting deserved criticism from those responsible for the criminal re-distribution of wealth from the poor and weak in society to the idle rich in the form of slashing benefits in order to fund tax cuts for our masters.

Diversionary tactics?

Have you no sense of decency to see what the issue is here?

Have you no sense of shame? Of right and wrong?

Well she made a heartfelt apology. Which is more than you did Phil Cox when you floated the idea of moving Watford Hospital out of Watford and then tried to backtrack saying you'd been misunderstood. People respect those who make mistakes, learn from them and genuinely apologise but not those who do not take responsibility for their actions.

Typical Labour, trying to change the subject, and even then distorting the truth horribly in their favour.

Heartfelt apology MJ1? It doesn't sound like one to me.

Quite despicable.

What is wrong with Labour politicians that they can do this in the first place and then do not find themselves able to make a full and heartfelt apology?

Could it be some politicians are only sorry to have been shown up for what they really are?

Typical UKIP see a passing bandwagon and try to jump on it. Only problem is Phil Cox that you have missed it by over playing your hand. The reason you wouldnt recognise a heartfelt apology is almost certainly because you've never made one. And I expect you never make mistakes either?

Still trying to change the subject and divert attention Mike?

Not good enough.

[quote][p][bold]MJ1[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Phil Cox (UKIP)[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]MJ1[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Phil Cox (UKIP)[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Honest Rog[/bold] wrote:
Nothing like a dose of diversionary tactics eh? This councillor has said/tweeted nothing that was factually incorrect. Those who make more of the, arguable, indelicacy of the tweet than the actual subject i.e. government attacks on the disabled show shallowness of thought. A great double whammy from the right-wing thought police: Kick an opposition politician whilst deflecting deserved criticism from those responsible for the criminal re-distribution of wealth from the poor and weak in society to the idle rich in the form of slashing benefits in order to fund tax cuts for our masters.[/p][/quote]Diversionary tactics?
Have you no sense of decency to see what the issue is here?
Have you no sense of shame? Of right and wrong?[/p][/quote]Well she made a heartfelt apology. Which is more than you did Phil Cox when you floated the idea of moving Watford Hospital out of Watford and then tried to backtrack saying you'd been misunderstood. People respect those who make mistakes, learn from them and genuinely apologise but not those who do not take responsibility for their actions.[/p][/quote]Typical Labour, trying to change the subject, and even then distorting the truth horribly in their favour.
Heartfelt apology MJ1? It doesn't sound like one to me.
Quite despicable.
What is wrong with Labour politicians that they can do this in the first place and then do not find themselves able to make a full and heartfelt apology?
Could it be some politicians are only sorry to have been shown up for what they really are?[/p][/quote]Typical UKIP see a passing bandwagon and try to jump on it. Only problem is Phil Cox that you have missed it by over playing your hand. The reason you wouldnt recognise a heartfelt apology is almost certainly because you've never made one. And I expect you never make mistakes either?[/p][/quote]Still trying to change the subject and divert attention Mike?
Not good enough.Phil Cox (UKIP)

MJ1 wrote…

Phil Cox (UKIP) wrote…

MJ1 wrote…

Phil Cox (UKIP) wrote…

Honest Rog wrote…

Nothing like a dose of diversionary tactics eh? This councillor has said/tweeted nothing that was factually incorrect. Those who make more of the, arguable, indelicacy of the tweet than the actual subject i.e. government attacks on the disabled show shallowness of thought. A great double whammy from the right-wing thought police: Kick an opposition politician whilst deflecting deserved criticism from those responsible for the criminal re-distribution of wealth from the poor and weak in society to the idle rich in the form of slashing benefits in order to fund tax cuts for our masters.

Diversionary tactics?

Have you no sense of decency to see what the issue is here?

Have you no sense of shame? Of right and wrong?

Well she made a heartfelt apology. Which is more than you did Phil Cox when you floated the idea of moving Watford Hospital out of Watford and then tried to backtrack saying you'd been misunderstood. People respect those who make mistakes, learn from them and genuinely apologise but not those who do not take responsibility for their actions.

Typical Labour, trying to change the subject, and even then distorting the truth horribly in their favour.

Heartfelt apology MJ1? It doesn't sound like one to me.

Quite despicable.

What is wrong with Labour politicians that they can do this in the first place and then do not find themselves able to make a full and heartfelt apology?

Could it be some politicians are only sorry to have been shown up for what they really are?

Typical UKIP see a passing bandwagon and try to jump on it. Only problem is Phil Cox that you have missed it by over playing your hand. The reason you wouldnt recognise a heartfelt apology is almost certainly because you've never made one. And I expect you never make mistakes either?

Still trying to change the subject and divert attention Mike?

Not good enough.

Score: -2

ancientandageing
4:21pm Thu 3 Jul 14

@phil cox
As I said Anne Joynes has clearly made an apology and much more than politicians usually do, but put the image on a smart phone maybe slightly cropped as Twitter does, or forget the reference is to Cameron’s own child and hey presto it is a very different tweet.
My opinion is you are being a totally opportunistic idiot here which is why MJ1 is coming bake at you on this. Time to get the popcorn out and watch you make an utter fool of yourself

@phil cox
As I said Anne Joynes has clearly made an apology and much more than politicians usually do, but put the image on a smart phone maybe slightly cropped as Twitter does, or forget the reference is to Cameron’s own child and hey presto it is a very different tweet.
My opinion is you are being a totally opportunistic idiot here which is why MJ1 is coming bake at you on this. Time to get the popcorn out and watch you make an utter fool of yourselfancientandageing

@phil cox
As I said Anne Joynes has clearly made an apology and much more than politicians usually do, but put the image on a smart phone maybe slightly cropped as Twitter does, or forget the reference is to Cameron’s own child and hey presto it is a very different tweet.
My opinion is you are being a totally opportunistic idiot here which is why MJ1 is coming bake at you on this. Time to get the popcorn out and watch you make an utter fool of yourself

Score: 2

Phil Cox (UKIP)
5:56pm Thu 3 Jul 14

Oh, so we should be grateful that she as a politician has given any sort of an apology? Really? Should we really?

What a sorry world it would be if we all lived by those rules.

As I said before, just not good enough (for decent people).

Oh, so we should be grateful that she as a politician has given any sort of an apology? Really? Should we really?
What a sorry world it would be if we all lived by those rules.
As I said before, just not good enough (for decent people).Phil Cox (UKIP)

Oh, so we should be grateful that she as a politician has given any sort of an apology? Really? Should we really?

What a sorry world it would be if we all lived by those rules.

As I said before, just not good enough (for decent people).

Score: -1

D_Penn
7:44pm Thu 3 Jul 14

MJ1 wrote…

Well you are almost the only one complaining. Most (decent) people are fair minded and accept we all sometimes make mistakes and accept apologies. But that is not the UKIP way. Intolerence is your middle name.
In your case you are just cynically trying to make political capital out of this. That's what I call despicable.

If this had been someone from any other party who had done this you would have been at their throats. Typical hypocritical left-winger who will throw mud at everyone but when a truth hits your side you try to twist it so that it's everybody else who is wrong.

Where did you get your moral compass from? The same shop as Luis Suarez?

[quote][p][bold]MJ1[/bold] wrote:
Well you are almost the only one complaining. Most (decent) people are fair minded and accept we all sometimes make mistakes and accept apologies. But that is not the UKIP way. Intolerence is your middle name.
In your case you are just cynically trying to make political capital out of this. That's what I call despicable.[/p][/quote]If this had been someone from any other party who had done this you would have been at their throats. Typical hypocritical left-winger who will throw mud at everyone but when a truth hits your side you try to twist it so that it's everybody else who is wrong.
Where did you get your moral compass from? The same shop as Luis Suarez?D_Penn

MJ1 wrote…

Well you are almost the only one complaining. Most (decent) people are fair minded and accept we all sometimes make mistakes and accept apologies. But that is not the UKIP way. Intolerence is your middle name.
In your case you are just cynically trying to make political capital out of this. That's what I call despicable.

If this had been someone from any other party who had done this you would have been at their throats. Typical hypocritical left-winger who will throw mud at everyone but when a truth hits your side you try to twist it so that it's everybody else who is wrong.

Where did you get your moral compass from? The same shop as Luis Suarez?

Score: -1

Phil Cox (UKIP)
7:52pm Thu 3 Jul 14

Mike, your idea of despicable behaviour is somewhat wide of the mark.

We have all made mistakes, and I hope that most of us have made proper apologies for them.

I have never however poked fun at someone's dead child, not for political ends or any other reason. It's not funny. It's not big. It's not clever. It is, in fact, despicable and deserves a full and proper apology at the very least. Then out of decency she should be sacked if she does not resign.

If you find her behaviour ok, in fact "not bad for a politician", then that says as much about you and your party as it does the Labour councillor who actually tweeted this.

What a sorry state of affairs for a once proud and upstanding party.

Mike, your idea of despicable behaviour is somewhat wide of the mark.
We have all made mistakes, and I hope that most of us have made proper apologies for them.
I have never however poked fun at someone's dead child, not for political ends or any other reason. It's not funny. It's not big. It's not clever. It is, in fact, despicable and deserves a full and proper apology at the very least. Then out of decency she should be sacked if she does not resign.
If you find her behaviour ok, in fact "not bad for a politician", then that says as much about you and your party as it does the Labour councillor who actually tweeted this.
What a sorry state of affairs for a once proud and upstanding party.Phil Cox (UKIP)

Mike, your idea of despicable behaviour is somewhat wide of the mark.

We have all made mistakes, and I hope that most of us have made proper apologies for them.

I have never however poked fun at someone's dead child, not for political ends or any other reason. It's not funny. It's not big. It's not clever. It is, in fact, despicable and deserves a full and proper apology at the very least. Then out of decency she should be sacked if she does not resign.

If you find her behaviour ok, in fact "not bad for a politician", then that says as much about you and your party as it does the Labour councillor who actually tweeted this.

What a sorry state of affairs for a once proud and upstanding party.

Score: -3

ancientandageing
7:56pm Thu 3 Jul 14

D_Penn wrote…

MJ1 wrote…

Well you are almost the only one complaining. Most (decent) people are fair minded and accept we all sometimes make mistakes and accept apologies. But that is not the UKIP way. Intolerence is your middle name.
In your case you are just cynically trying to make political capital out of this. That's what I call despicable.

If this had been someone from any other party who had done this you would have been at their throats. Typical hypocritical left-winger who will throw mud at everyone but when a truth hits your side you try to twist it so that it's everybody else who is wrong.

Where did you get your moral compass from? The same shop as Luis Suarez?

oh goody the return of the UKIP double act David Penn and Phil Cox, now I think I am going to need a bigger bag of popcorn, this looks like a very typical UKIP ploy of trying to attack Labour at any oppertuinty and deflecting attention from their own shortcomings.

[quote][p][bold]D_Penn[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]MJ1[/bold] wrote:
Well you are almost the only one complaining. Most (decent) people are fair minded and accept we all sometimes make mistakes and accept apologies. But that is not the UKIP way. Intolerence is your middle name.
In your case you are just cynically trying to make political capital out of this. That's what I call despicable.[/p][/quote]If this had been someone from any other party who had done this you would have been at their throats. Typical hypocritical left-winger who will throw mud at everyone but when a truth hits your side you try to twist it so that it's everybody else who is wrong.
Where did you get your moral compass from? The same shop as Luis Suarez?[/p][/quote]oh goody the return of the UKIP double act David Penn and Phil Cox, now I think I am going to need a bigger bag of popcorn, this looks like a very typical UKIP ploy of trying to attack Labour at any oppertuinty and deflecting attention from their own shortcomings.ancientandageing

D_Penn wrote…

MJ1 wrote…

Well you are almost the only one complaining. Most (decent) people are fair minded and accept we all sometimes make mistakes and accept apologies. But that is not the UKIP way. Intolerence is your middle name.
In your case you are just cynically trying to make political capital out of this. That's what I call despicable.

If this had been someone from any other party who had done this you would have been at their throats. Typical hypocritical left-winger who will throw mud at everyone but when a truth hits your side you try to twist it so that it's everybody else who is wrong.

Where did you get your moral compass from? The same shop as Luis Suarez?

oh goody the return of the UKIP double act David Penn and Phil Cox, now I think I am going to need a bigger bag of popcorn, this looks like a very typical UKIP ploy of trying to attack Labour at any oppertuinty and deflecting attention from their own shortcomings.

Score: 1

Honest Rog
5:12am Fri 4 Jul 14

I stand by every word of my original post. There is nothing disrespectful there, only in the fertile minds of the UKRAP double act could any interpretation of such be attached.
Shame? Yes Phil I have felt this emotion many times in my life. I'm human. Not on this occasion though. I see this storm in a teacup in a pragmatic way as opposed to desperate, would be politicians attempting to whip up moral outrage among the "decent people" they claim to represent.
There'll be another bandwagon along soon Reg.

I stand by every word of my original post. There is nothing disrespectful there, only in the fertile minds of the UKRAP double act could any interpretation of such be attached.
Shame? Yes Phil I have felt this emotion many times in my life. I'm human. Not on this occasion though. I see this storm in a teacup in a pragmatic way as opposed to desperate, would be politicians attempting to whip up moral outrage among the "decent people" they claim to represent.
There'll be another bandwagon along soon Reg.Honest Rog

I stand by every word of my original post. There is nothing disrespectful there, only in the fertile minds of the UKRAP double act could any interpretation of such be attached.
Shame? Yes Phil I have felt this emotion many times in my life. I'm human. Not on this occasion though. I see this storm in a teacup in a pragmatic way as opposed to desperate, would be politicians attempting to whip up moral outrage among the "decent people" they claim to represent.
There'll be another bandwagon along soon Reg.

Score: 2

Hornets number 12 fan
1:04pm Fri 4 Jul 14

Typical that this has been hijacked by Politicians! no mention of the appalling way the sick and disabled are being treated in this country! No wonder people have lost interest and trust in the political system! !

Typical that this has been hijacked by Politicians! no mention of the appalling way the sick and disabled are being treated in this country! No wonder people have lost interest and trust in the political system! !Hornets number 12 fan

Typical that this has been hijacked by Politicians! no mention of the appalling way the sick and disabled are being treated in this country! No wonder people have lost interest and trust in the political system! !

Score: 1

Phil Cox (UKIP)
1:25pm Fri 4 Jul 14

A local politician made fun of the disabled dead son of our PM.

That's what the story is about. If you want a WO article about disability benefits then ask for one, this is not it nor should it become it.

This story is solely about "Watford Councillor Anne Joynes apologises for retweeting image attacking David Cameron using his dead disabled son Ivan".

The headline is very clear. It's about behaviour. Taste. Standards. Decency. The ability to offer a proper apology. The way a party treats a councillor that brings it into disrepute.

Labour have tried to spin it as something else. I'm sorry, it really is all about Anne Joynes and how she has behaved.

Readers will make up their own minds. The scores on comments give a hint of what some readers think. Labour appear overwhelmingly found wanting despite multiple postings from supporters and who knows, maybe even people closely linked to the story.

There's no need to hijack a story like this. Labour have shown they are perfectly capable of damaging their cause without any outside help.

A local politician made fun of the disabled dead son of our PM.
That's what the story is about. If you want a WO article about disability benefits then ask for one, this is not it nor should it become it.
This story is solely about "Watford Councillor Anne Joynes apologises for retweeting image attacking David Cameron using his dead disabled son Ivan".
The headline is very clear. It's about behaviour. Taste. Standards. Decency. The ability to offer a proper apology. The way a party treats a councillor that brings it into disrepute.
Labour have tried to spin it as something else. I'm sorry, it really is all about Anne Joynes and how she has behaved.
Readers will make up their own minds. The scores on comments give a hint of what some readers think. Labour appear overwhelmingly found wanting despite multiple postings from supporters and who knows, maybe even people closely linked to the story.
There's no need to hijack a story like this. Labour have shown they are perfectly capable of damaging their cause without any outside help.Phil Cox (UKIP)

A local politician made fun of the disabled dead son of our PM.

That's what the story is about. If you want a WO article about disability benefits then ask for one, this is not it nor should it become it.

This story is solely about "Watford Councillor Anne Joynes apologises for retweeting image attacking David Cameron using his dead disabled son Ivan".

The headline is very clear. It's about behaviour. Taste. Standards. Decency. The ability to offer a proper apology. The way a party treats a councillor that brings it into disrepute.

Labour have tried to spin it as something else. I'm sorry, it really is all about Anne Joynes and how she has behaved.

Readers will make up their own minds. The scores on comments give a hint of what some readers think. Labour appear overwhelmingly found wanting despite multiple postings from supporters and who knows, maybe even people closely linked to the story.

There's no need to hijack a story like this. Labour have shown they are perfectly capable of damaging their cause without any outside help.

Score: 0

garston tony
1:50pm Fri 4 Jul 14

Hornets number 12 fan wrote…

Typical that this has been hijacked by Politicians! no mention of the appalling way the sick and disabled are being treated in this country! No wonder people have lost interest and trust in the political system! !

You're the one using the sick and disabled as a a reason to attack the government, who by the way are still on the whole very well looked after in our country.

Is the system perfect, no. But it wasnt perfect before either. All that is happening now is that resources are being concentrated on needs rather than wants

[quote][p][bold]Hornets number 12 fan[/bold] wrote:
Typical that this has been hijacked by Politicians! no mention of the appalling way the sick and disabled are being treated in this country! No wonder people have lost interest and trust in the political system! ![/p][/quote]You're the one using the sick and disabled as a a reason to attack the government, who by the way are still on the whole very well looked after in our country.
Is the system perfect, no. But it wasnt perfect before either. All that is happening now is that resources are being concentrated on needs rather than wantsgarston tony

Hornets number 12 fan wrote…

Typical that this has been hijacked by Politicians! no mention of the appalling way the sick and disabled are being treated in this country! No wonder people have lost interest and trust in the political system! !

You're the one using the sick and disabled as a a reason to attack the government, who by the way are still on the whole very well looked after in our country.

Is the system perfect, no. But it wasnt perfect before either. All that is happening now is that resources are being concentrated on needs rather than wants

Score: 6

ancientandageing
2:43pm Fri 4 Jul 14

Phil Cox you are showing yourself up here.
“A local politician made fun of the disabled dead son of our PM” no such thing happened had she knowingly RT’ed then what she did was knowingly point at his hypocrisy albeit in bad taste. The fact is that this gov has undermined the benefit system for disabled people, and that the PM took full advantage of it despite his wealth.
Now possum In personally would not do it, but the fact is that even on a laptop the name is hard to read so when she says she wouldn’t or some such she is saying she did not read the name, you are being a total fool for overplaying this, now toddle of ole boy and read up on Enoch Powell or whatever else you UKIPers do in your spare time

Phil Cox you are showing yourself up here.
“A local politician made fun of the disabled dead son of our PM” no such thing happened had she knowingly RT’ed then what she did was knowingly point at his hypocrisy albeit in bad taste. The fact is that this gov has undermined the benefit system for disabled people, and that the PM took full advantage of it despite his wealth.
Now possum In personally would not do it, but the fact is that even on a laptop the name is hard to read so when she says she wouldn’t or some such she is saying she did not read the name, you are being a total fool for overplaying this, now toddle of ole boy and read up on Enoch Powell or whatever else you UKIPers do in your spare timeancientandageing

Phil Cox you are showing yourself up here.
“A local politician made fun of the disabled dead son of our PM” no such thing happened had she knowingly RT’ed then what she did was knowingly point at his hypocrisy albeit in bad taste. The fact is that this gov has undermined the benefit system for disabled people, and that the PM took full advantage of it despite his wealth.
Now possum In personally would not do it, but the fact is that even on a laptop the name is hard to read so when she says she wouldn’t or some such she is saying she did not read the name, you are being a total fool for overplaying this, now toddle of ole boy and read up on Enoch Powell or whatever else you UKIPers do in your spare time

Score: 1

Phil Cox (UKIP)
2:53pm Fri 4 Jul 14

ancientandageing wrote…

Phil Cox you are showing yourself up here.
“A local politician made fun of the disabled dead son of our PM” no such thing happened had she knowingly RT’ed then what she did was knowingly point at his hypocrisy albeit in bad taste. The fact is that this gov has undermined the benefit system for disabled people, and that the PM took full advantage of it despite his wealth.
Now possum In personally would not do it, but the fact is that even on a laptop the name is hard to read so when she says she wouldn’t or some such she is saying she did not read the name, you are being a total fool for overplaying this, now toddle of ole boy and read up on Enoch Powell or whatever else you UKIPers do in your spare time

She never said that. You did.

Be careful to keep your story straight.

[quote][p][bold]ancientandageing[/bold] wrote:
Phil Cox you are showing yourself up here.
“A local politician made fun of the disabled dead son of our PM” no such thing happened had she knowingly RT’ed then what she did was knowingly point at his hypocrisy albeit in bad taste. The fact is that this gov has undermined the benefit system for disabled people, and that the PM took full advantage of it despite his wealth.
Now possum In personally would not do it, but the fact is that even on a laptop the name is hard to read so when she says she wouldn’t or some such she is saying she did not read the name, you are being a total fool for overplaying this, now toddle of ole boy and read up on Enoch Powell or whatever else you UKIPers do in your spare time[/p][/quote]She never said that. You did.
Be careful to keep your story straight.Phil Cox (UKIP)

ancientandageing wrote…

Phil Cox you are showing yourself up here.
“A local politician made fun of the disabled dead son of our PM” no such thing happened had she knowingly RT’ed then what she did was knowingly point at his hypocrisy albeit in bad taste. The fact is that this gov has undermined the benefit system for disabled people, and that the PM took full advantage of it despite his wealth.
Now possum In personally would not do it, but the fact is that even on a laptop the name is hard to read so when she says she wouldn’t or some such she is saying she did not read the name, you are being a total fool for overplaying this, now toddle of ole boy and read up on Enoch Powell or whatever else you UKIPers do in your spare time

She never said that. You did.

Be careful to keep your story straight.

Score: -2

ancientandageing
3:03pm Fri 4 Jul 14

Phil Cox (UKIP) wrote…

ancientandageing wrote…

Phil Cox you are showing yourself up here.
“A local politician made fun of the disabled dead son of our PM” no such thing happened had she knowingly RT’ed then what she did was knowingly point at his hypocrisy albeit in bad taste. The fact is that this gov has undermined the benefit system for disabled people, and that the PM took full advantage of it despite his wealth.
Now possum In personally would not do it, but the fact is that even on a laptop the name is hard to read so when she says she wouldn’t or some such she is saying she did not read the name, you are being a total fool for overplaying this, now toddle of ole boy and read up on Enoch Powell or whatever else you UKIPers do in your spare time

She never said that. You did.

Be careful to keep your story straight.

gosh is that a threat :-be carefull or what

BTW although not verbartum she did say

“I would never, ever use anything like that. It’s despicable to put it up.
“I do not use Twitter like that. It was a complete mistake. It’s awful. It was careless. I shall have to be really careful what I do on Twitter.”

I would say "wouldn't or some such" is a fair enough summary of what she said by inference clearly I deduced the rest based on the FACT that I could not read the name on the snapshot in the story and struggled to read it on twitter.

Now as I said go toddle of and read up on Enoch or maybe write a liberterian article on why its acceptable for busnisess to discriminate against people becouse they are black or sme such

[quote][p][bold]Phil Cox (UKIP)[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]ancientandageing[/bold] wrote:
Phil Cox you are showing yourself up here.
“A local politician made fun of the disabled dead son of our PM” no such thing happened had she knowingly RT’ed then what she did was knowingly point at his hypocrisy albeit in bad taste. The fact is that this gov has undermined the benefit system for disabled people, and that the PM took full advantage of it despite his wealth.
Now possum In personally would not do it, but the fact is that even on a laptop the name is hard to read so when she says she wouldn’t or some such she is saying she did not read the name, you are being a total fool for overplaying this, now toddle of ole boy and read up on Enoch Powell or whatever else you UKIPers do in your spare time[/p][/quote]She never said that. You did.
Be careful to keep your story straight.[/p][/quote]gosh is that a threat :-be carefull or what
BTW although not verbartum she did say
“I would never, ever use anything like that. It’s despicable to put it up.
“I do not use Twitter like that. It was a complete mistake. It’s awful. It was careless. I shall have to be really careful what I do on Twitter.”
I would say "wouldn't or some such" is a fair enough summary of what she said by inference clearly I deduced the rest based on the FACT that I could not read the name on the snapshot in the story and struggled to read it on twitter.
Now as I said go toddle of and read up on Enoch or maybe write a liberterian article on why its acceptable for busnisess to discriminate against people becouse they are black or sme suchancientandageing

Phil Cox (UKIP) wrote…

ancientandageing wrote…

Phil Cox you are showing yourself up here.
“A local politician made fun of the disabled dead son of our PM” no such thing happened had she knowingly RT’ed then what she did was knowingly point at his hypocrisy albeit in bad taste. The fact is that this gov has undermined the benefit system for disabled people, and that the PM took full advantage of it despite his wealth.
Now possum In personally would not do it, but the fact is that even on a laptop the name is hard to read so when she says she wouldn’t or some such she is saying she did not read the name, you are being a total fool for overplaying this, now toddle of ole boy and read up on Enoch Powell or whatever else you UKIPers do in your spare time

She never said that. You did.

Be careful to keep your story straight.

gosh is that a threat :-be carefull or what

BTW although not verbartum she did say

“I would never, ever use anything like that. It’s despicable to put it up.
“I do not use Twitter like that. It was a complete mistake. It’s awful. It was careless. I shall have to be really careful what I do on Twitter.”

I would say "wouldn't or some such" is a fair enough summary of what she said by inference clearly I deduced the rest based on the FACT that I could not read the name on the snapshot in the story and struggled to read it on twitter.

Now as I said go toddle of and read up on Enoch or maybe write a liberterian article on why its acceptable for busnisess to discriminate against people becouse they are black or sme such

Score: -2

Hornets number 12 fan
3:04pm Fri 4 Jul 14

garston tony wrote…

Hornets number 12 fan wrote…

Typical that this has been hijacked by Politicians! no mention of the appalling way the sick and disabled are being treated in this country! No wonder people have lost interest and trust in the political system! !

You're the one using the sick and disabled as a a reason to attack the government, who by the way are still on the whole very well looked after in our country.

Is the system perfect, no. But it wasnt perfect before either. All that is happening now is that resources are being concentrated on needs rather than wants

Stop trying to convince me that you don't live in the real world because you're in grave danger of succeeding!

[quote][p][bold]garston tony[/bold] wrote:
[quote][p][bold]Hornets number 12 fan[/bold] wrote:
Typical that this has been hijacked by Politicians! no mention of the appalling way the sick and disabled are being treated in this country! No wonder people have lost interest and trust in the political system! ![/p][/quote]You're the one using the sick and disabled as a a reason to attack the government, who by the way are still on the whole very well looked after in our country.
Is the system perfect, no. But it wasnt perfect before either. All that is happening now is that resources are being concentrated on needs rather than wants[/p][/quote]Stop trying to convince me that you don't live in the real world because you're in grave danger of succeeding!Hornets number 12 fan

garston tony wrote…

Hornets number 12 fan wrote…

Typical that this has been hijacked by Politicians! no mention of the appalling way the sick and disabled are being treated in this country! No wonder people have lost interest and trust in the political system! !

You're the one using the sick and disabled as a a reason to attack the government, who by the way are still on the whole very well looked after in our country.

Is the system perfect, no. But it wasnt perfect before either. All that is happening now is that resources are being concentrated on needs rather than wants

Stop trying to convince me that you don't live in the real world because you're in grave danger of succeeding!

Score: -4

cgpc Rob
7:18pm Fri 4 Jul 14

Should she resign, her decision.

Should she be sacked, Standards Board has been disbanded.

Is there any way of making an official complaint and action to be taken, doubt it.

It comes down to individual choice.

Should she offer to resign and possibly pay for a by election, if the residents vote her in again, then that's down to them.

Should there be recall, as promised!

Should she resign, her decision.
Should she be sacked, Standards Board has been disbanded.
Is there any way of making an official complaint and action to be taken, doubt it.
It comes down to individual choice.
Should she offer to resign and possibly pay for a by election, if the residents vote her in again, then that's down to them.
Should there be recall, as promised!cgpc Rob

Should she resign, her decision.

Should she be sacked, Standards Board has been disbanded.

Is there any way of making an official complaint and action to be taken, doubt it.

It comes down to individual choice.

Should she offer to resign and possibly pay for a by election, if the residents vote her in again, then that's down to them.

Should there be recall, as promised!

Score: 0

audentior01923
10:57am Mon 7 Jul 14

Dear Anne (ancientandageing) and Phil (Phil Cox UKIP)

I equally cant stand you both and I don't thing Ann is fit to represent my shoe laces let alone anyone else, however if what Ann says is true than I will give her the benefit of the doubt, a careless or accidental retweet, or a favourited tweet can and does happen in the new age of technology,and whilst careless if what she says is true then I wouldn't say malicious, more naive and stupid.........

What would you rather be naive and stupid, or calculating and malicious ?

Dear Anne (ancientandageing) and Phil (Phil Cox UKIP)
I equally cant stand you both and I don't thing Ann is fit to represent my shoe laces let alone anyone else, however if what Ann says is true than I will give her the benefit of the doubt, a careless or accidental retweet, or a favourited tweet can and does happen in the new age of technology,and whilst careless if what she says is true then I wouldn't say malicious, more naive and stupid.........
What would you rather be naive and stupid, or calculating and malicious ?audentior01923

Dear Anne (ancientandageing) and Phil (Phil Cox UKIP)

I equally cant stand you both and I don't thing Ann is fit to represent my shoe laces let alone anyone else, however if what Ann says is true than I will give her the benefit of the doubt, a careless or accidental retweet, or a favourited tweet can and does happen in the new age of technology,and whilst careless if what she says is true then I wouldn't say malicious, more naive and stupid.........

What would you rather be naive and stupid, or calculating and malicious ?

Score: 5

ancientandageing
10:50pm Mon 7 Jul 14

audentior01923 wrote…

Dear Anne (ancientandageing) and Phil (Phil Cox UKIP)

I equally cant stand you both and I don't thing Ann is fit to represent my shoe laces let alone anyone else, however if what Ann says is true than I will give her the benefit of the doubt, a careless or accidental retweet, or a favourited tweet can and does happen in the new age of technology,and whilst careless if what she says is true then I wouldn't say malicious, more naive and stupid.........

What would you rather be naive and stupid, or calculating and malicious ?

you really are barking up the wrong tree if you think I am Anne either that (or just plain barking) still I must carry some of the can for your misconception. Dont Know why You would think I was anne (with an e) Nor do I care ole bean

[quote][p][bold]audentior01923[/bold] wrote:
Dear Anne (ancientandageing) and Phil (Phil Cox UKIP)
I equally cant stand you both and I don't thing Ann is fit to represent my shoe laces let alone anyone else, however if what Ann says is true than I will give her the benefit of the doubt, a careless or accidental retweet, or a favourited tweet can and does happen in the new age of technology,and whilst careless if what she says is true then I wouldn't say malicious, more naive and stupid.........
What would you rather be naive and stupid, or calculating and malicious ?[/p][/quote]you really are barking up the wrong tree if you think I am Anne either that (or just plain barking) still I must carry some of the can for your misconception. Dont Know why You would think I was anne (with an e) Nor do I care ole beanancientandageing

audentior01923 wrote…

Dear Anne (ancientandageing) and Phil (Phil Cox UKIP)

I equally cant stand you both and I don't thing Ann is fit to represent my shoe laces let alone anyone else, however if what Ann says is true than I will give her the benefit of the doubt, a careless or accidental retweet, or a favourited tweet can and does happen in the new age of technology,and whilst careless if what she says is true then I wouldn't say malicious, more naive and stupid.........

What would you rather be naive and stupid, or calculating and malicious ?

you really are barking up the wrong tree if you think I am Anne either that (or just plain barking) still I must carry some of the can for your misconception. Dont Know why You would think I was anne (with an e) Nor do I care ole bean

Ipsoregulated

This website and associated newspapers adhere to the Independent Press Standards Organisation's Editors' Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about the editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then please contact the editor here. If you are dissatisfied with the response provided you can contact IPSO here